The polysemous cognates English go, German gehen and Norwegian gå : a corpus-based contrastive study

(1)

English go, German gehen and Norwegian gå:

A CorpusBased Contrastive Study

by Alla Cej

A Thesis Presented to

the Department of Literature,

Area Studies and European Languages

University of Oslo

Spring term 2008

(2)

List of tables

Table 2-1 The distribution of go according to syntactic category...32

Table 2-2 The distribution of go according to meaning...32

Table 3-1 The distribution of go according to syntactic category when the verb means locomotion...34

Table 3-2 German translations of go used in the meaning of locomotion...36

Table 3-3 German translations of multi-word verb go...38

Table 3-4 Syntactic categories of the German translations of the phrasal verbs with go...40

Table 3-5 Syntactic distribution of the German translations of the simple intransitive go...43

Table 3-6 Norwegian translations of the locomotion verb go...45

Table 3-7 Translations of the multi-word verb go in the meaning of locomotion and their syntactic patterns...46

Table 3-8 The syntactic distribution of the translations of the multi-word verb go...49

Table 3-9 Syntactic distribution of the Norwegian translations of the simple intransitive go.51 Table 3-10 German and Norwegian translations of the locomotion verb go...53

Table 4-1 German translations of the verb go used in the metaphorical meaning...57

Table 4-2 German translations of the multi-word verb go used in specialized and metaphorical meanings...58

Table 4-3 Translations of the phrasal verb go and its syntactic categories...60

Table 4-4 Syntactic distribution of the German translations of the prepositional verb go...62

Table 4-5 Syntactic categories of the translations of the phrasal-prepositional verbs...64

Table 4-6 Syntactic categories of the translations of the simple intransitive go...65

Table 4-7 Syntactic categories of the translations of the copular go...68

Table 4-8 Norwegian translations of the specialized and metaphorical uses of go...70

Table 4-9 Norwegian translations of the multi-word verb go and their syntactic categories..73

Table 4-10 Syntactic categories of the translations of the phrasal verb go...74

Table 4-11 Syntactic categories of the translations of the prepositional go... 75

(6)

Table 4-12 Syntactic categories of the translations of the phrasal-prepositional go...78

Table 4-13 Syntactic categories of the translations of the simple intransitive go...80

Table 4-14 Syntactic categories of the translations of the copular go...81

Table 4-15 German and Norwegian translations of the specialised and metaphorical uses of go...83

Table 5-1 German translations of be going to...85

Table 5-2 Translations with werden according to tense...86

Table 5-3 Norwegian translations of be going to...90

Table 5-4 The frequency of ville in the translations according to tense... 90

Table 5-5 German translations of go on...94

Table 5-6 Norwegian translations of go on...96

Table 5-7 German and Norwegian translations of be going to...98

Table 5-8 German and Norwegian translations of go on...99

(7)

List of figures

Figure 1The Oslo Multilingual Corpus: English-Norwegian-German...19

Diagram 1 Translations of go by its cognates in different semantic categories...101

Diagram 2 Congruent translations of go used in the sense of locomotion...102

Diagram 3 Congruent translations of metaphorical and specialized uses of go...103

Diagram 4 Distribution of paraphrase in different semantic categories...105

(8)

1 Introduction

1.1 Aim of the study

The cognates English go, German gehen and Norwegian gå are frequently occurring verbs, which are found to express several different meanings. The main aim of the present thesis is to describe English go, German gehen and Norwegian gå in a contrastive perspective. This task will be pursued through examining 500 occurrences of go and its translations into German and Norwegian in the Oslo Multilingual Corpus (see 1.4).

The fact that go, gehen and gå are cognates entails that they have a common etymological origin (Matthews 1997). According to Gronemeyer (1999:18), “lexical items with similar meanings are likely to develop in similar ways in the same contexts”. The following investigation will show whether this is true of go, gehen and gå, whether there are any inconsistencies in the translation of go from English to Norwegian and German, and whether these verbs express the same meanings in the three languages. These languages were chosen in the hope that in comparing three languages their differences would come out more clearly. According to Johansson, (2004:173):

The more languages we include, the more clearly can we see the characteristics of each language, and the more general questions can we ask about the nature of the language and the characteristics of translation.

(9)

1.2 Previous work

The current paper is inspired by studies in which the verb go and other verbs have been analysed contrastively, particularly works by Viberg (1996; 1999a; 1999b; 2002), Oksefjell Ebeling (2003) and Petra Storjohann (2003).

Viberg looks at Swedish-English verb pairs. The most relevant articles for this study are “Cross-linguistic lexicology. The case of English go and Swedish gå” (1996) and “The Polysemous Cognates Swedish gå and English go” (1999a). These articles are concerned with the contrasting patterns of polysemy of Swedish gå and English go based on data from the English-Swedish Parallel Corpus. By looking at the degree of intertranslatability of Swedish and English verbs and the extent to which their meaning extensions are shared Viberg measures the semantic similarity between those verbs. The studies show that, in spite of all language-specific differences, which result in a low level of intertranslatability of go and gå,

“the patterns of polysemy are similar at a general level” (Viberg 1999a:112).

Petra Storjohann (2003) investigates verbs of human locomotion semantically in her diachronic contrastive study of locomotion verbs in German and English. Her thesis focuses on the diachronic development of “verbs that express different modes of progression”

(Storjohann 2003:236). Her study stresses the “instrument” features.

Oksefjell Ebeling (2003) studies the syntactic and semantic features of the two

Norwegian verbs bli and få in a corpus-based contrastive study. The main aim of the thesis is to give a thorough description of the verbs which are investigated in the light of their English correspondences. The study is based on material from the English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus.

(10)

1.3 Theoretical basis

1.3.1 Viberg’s classification

A principal source for this study is Viberg’s (1999a) “The Polysemous Cognates Swedish gå and English go.” The present study follows his classification of meaning, which he presents

“in three groups: 1) Locomotion in concrete space by a human agent, 2) Extended meanings (except grammaticalized ones) and 3) Grammaticalized meanings” (Viberg 1999a:90).

Viberg studies the multiple meanings of these frequent motion verbs, he looks at their intertranslatability, which is rather low in case with go and gå: “they serve as translations of one another only in roughly one third of the cases in the corpus” (Viberg 1999:88). Viberg’s article has served as the main source of inspiration for the present thesis, both with respect to theory and methodology.

1.3.2 Pattern grammar

Another source of inspiration is the work of Susan Hunston and Gill Francis on Pattern Grammar. In their work they describe an approach to lexis and grammar which is based on the concept of phraseology and language patterning arising from work on corpora. They write about patterns that are “associated with particular lexical items and that are observable from investigation of an electronically-stored corpus of written and spoken texts” (Hunston &

Francis, 2000:1). In their book they follow the Collins Cobuild Grammar Patterns series and

“use ‘pattern’ to describe more general statements of behaviour.” “…a pattern is a description of the behaviour of the lexical item, or one of the behaviours of that item” (Hunston & Francis 2000:247).

(11)

Following Sinclair, they argue that it is difficult to distinguish boundaries between lexis and grammar based on the observations of pattern and phraseology making use of a large corpus: “a description of a word and its patterns cannot be classified under the heading either of ‘lexis’ or of ‘grammar’… patterns are so central to the description of language, this cross- classification cannot be dismissed as a marginal peculiarity, but it must count as a challenge to the distiction between lexis and grammar itself, so that the word ‘grammar’, if it is used at all, must comprise information about lexis as well as information about syntax” (Hunston &

Francis 2000:250-251).

Hunston and Francis give evidence for the argument that “…sense and syntax, or meaning and pattern, are associated”, namely, when a word has different meanings, the meanings are distinguished by having different patterns and “words with the same pattern share aspects of meaning” (Hunston & Francis 2000:255-256).

1.3.3 Grammaticalization

The verb go has grammaticalized meanings, i.e. it has developed grammatical functions which will be studied in this thesis. According to Evans and Green (2006:708), “…the term

‘grammaticalisation’ suggests a type of grammatical change, grammaticalisation in fact involves correlated changes in sound, meaning and grammar. In other words, the process of grammaticalisation affects the phonology, morphosyntax and meaning or function in a given symbolic unit”.

The future marker be going to is derived from the motion verb go; such “meaning- form correlations” are found in a wide range of languages. Hopper and Traugott (2003:2-3)

(12)

list several factors typical of grammaticalization viewed historically which are illustrated by the construction be going to:

a) the change occurs only in a very local context, that of purposive directional constructions with non-finite complements.

b) The change is made possible by the fact that there is an inference of futurity from purposives.

c) The shift from purposive be going to to auxiliary be going to involves reanalysis not only of the be going to phrase but of the verb following it. It also involves a change from progressive aspect to “immediate future”.

d) The reanalysis is discoverable, that is, is manifested, only when the verb following be going to is incompatible with a purposive meaning, or at least unlikely in that context,... In other words, the reanalysis is discoverable only because the context in which be going to can occur has been generalized, or analogised, to context that were unavailable before.

e) Once the reanalysis has occurred, be going to can undergo changes typical of auxiliaries, such as phonological reduction. The reduction of the three morphemes go-ing to into one (gonna) is possible only because there is no longer a phrasal boundary between –ing and to.

f) The various stages of grammaticalization of be going (to...) coexist in Modern English, although the change originates in the fifteenth century or perhaps even earlier.

(13)

g) The original purposive meaning continues to constrain the use of the auxiliary: be gonna is the future of intention, plan, or schedule.

h) The main verb go is relatively general in meaning, that is, it expresses any kind of motion away from the speaker, including walking, meandering, running, riding, etc.

i) As grammaticalization has taken place, some of the original relatively concrete meaning of go has been lost, specifically motion and directionality. However, some new meanings have also been added; these are more abstract and speaker- based meanings, specifically temporal meanings based on speaker time.

The construction be going to and its translations into German and Norwegian will be further investigated in the present study, along with another grammaticalized meaning of go, namely go on as a marker of continuation.

1.4 A preliminary look at the meanings of go, gehen and gå

The verb meaning ‘go’ constitutes one of the most basic verbs across a wide range of languages and a high degree of polysemy of this verb is representative of the class of very frequent verbs.

(Viberg 1999a:88)

(14)

The cognates go, gehen and gå have a wide range of meaning, i.e. they are

polysemous. “Polysemy refers to the situation where the same word has two or more different meanings, from Greek poly, ‘many’ + semeion, ‘sign’” (Jackson and Ze Amvela 2000:58).

The Oxford Dictionary of English gives the following basic meaning for go: “move from one place to another; travel”. According to Storjohann (2003:140), “the lexeme go can collocate with partners describing various INSTRUMENT features”, for example by means of an animal, vehicle, ship and plane. Viberg (1999a:89) lists the ten most frequent verbs of motion in English and Swedish according to the English-Swedish Parallel Corpus. Go is listed in first place and is followed by come. Swedish gå is in the second place following komma. There is a similar relationship for German gehen and Norwegian gå, according to The Oslo Multilingual Corpus. German gehen (used 517 times in 21 texts) follows kommen (627);

gå (1653 in 22 texts) follows komme (1827).

Viberg regards go as one of the “nuclear verbs” around which the verbal semantic field of motion is organised. The term “nuclear verbs” describes verbs “which are

typologically unmarked and tend to have the same basic meaning in a wide range of languages” (Viberg 1999a:88)

German gehen is a semantically flexible verb with various meanings, with the basic meaning defined by Duden Deutsches Universalwörterbuch as: “sich in aufrechter Haltung auf den Füβen schrittweise fortbewegen” (Duden 2007:657).

The primary meaning of Norwegian gå as defined in Norsk Ordbok is: “(med grunnbet. av bevegelse uten fremhevelse av utgangspunkt eller mål) 1 (i mer egentlig bet.) bevege seg ved å flytte føttene (t. forskj. fra løpe) slik at stadig minst en fot er i bakken”

(Norsk Ordbok 1998:326).

(15)

Gân, gangan and gên are all etyma of gehen, go and gå. Gân, gangan and gên are usually treated as different forms of one lemma (Storjohann 2003:98,164). The Oxford Dictionary of English has this to say on the origin of go: “Old English gān, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch gaan and German gehen; the form went was originally the past tense of wend”.

Gehen, go and gå, which serve as the most general expressions of locomotion in the three languages, can also express contextual meanings which depend strongly on the context and metaphorical meanings as shown in the following example, where go is used as a copular verb:

(1.1a) The line went dead. (DL2.1) (1.1b) Die Verbindung brach ab.

(1.1c) Forbindelsen ble brutt.

In example (1.1) the German and Norwegian translations are quite similar in that they do not convey any metaphorical meaning and use translation equivalents of the same verb “break”.

The only difference between the two is on the syntactic level as Norwegian uses a passive form of the verb bryte, and German has the active abbrechen.

In examples (1.2) and (1.3) below the verb go expresses grammaticalized meanings.

Example (1.2) illustrates the use of go as a marker of continuation and its most frequent German and Norwegian translations “werden” and “vil”.

(1.2a) No giant is going to come along and suck out all the water for you: that magic stuff is not going to help. (ROB1.1.2)

(1.2b) Es wird kein Riese vorbeikommen, der das Wasser für dich aus dem Tümpel saugt: Keine Zauberei wird dir dabei helfen.

(16)

(1.2c) Ingen kjempe vil dukke opp for å drikke opp alt vannet i tjernet for deg; en slik magi vil ikke inntreffe.

In (1.3) go is used as a marker of continuation which is often translated by German

“fortfahren” and Norwegian “fortsette”.

(1.3a) He went on to compare the cycling of the nutritious elements in the soil, and the movement of water from the oceans to the land, with the circulation of the blood. (JL1.1)

(1.3b) Er fuhr fort, den Kreislauf der Nährstoffe im Boden und die Bewegung der Ozeane zum Land hin mit der Zirkulation des Blutes zu vergleichen.

(1.3c) Han fortsatte med å sammenligne sirkulasjonen av næringselementer i jorden og bevegelsen av vann fra havene til landområdene med blodsirkulasjonen.

1.5 A corpus-based contrastive study

The current study is based on data from the Oslo Multilingual Corpus, thus it is founded on observation of language in use. The development of multilingual text corpora has brought a variety of possibilities to the field of cross-linguistic research, and can be used for many purposes in contrastive lexical studies. These are some of the points which are summarised in Altenberg and Granger (2002:13-14):

• they offer a firm empirical basis for cross-linguistic lexical studies, providing richer and more reliable information about the degree of correspondence between lexical items in different languages than comparisons based on introspection;

• they give new insights into the lexis of the languages compared – insights that are likely to be missed in studies of monolingual corpora;

(17)

• they can be used for a range of comparative purposes and increase our knowledge of language specific, typological and cultural differences, as well of universal features;

• they can be used to study the lexical systems as well as the contextual use of lexical items, and thus provide information about paradigmatic as well as syntagmatic lexical relations;

• they can serve to disambiguate polysemous items, reveal the degree of mutual correspondence of lexical items in different languages, and uncover cross-linguistic sets of translation equivalents in the languages compared.

These points are particularly relevant to the current thesis, since the intention here is to examine a number of occurrences of the verb go and its translations into German and

Norwegian and give an accurate description of these. The use of corpora of original texts and their translations, translation corpora (Johansson 1999:5), has a relatively long history. Viberg (2002:121) mentions Wandruszka (1996), who used 60 publications in six Germanic and Romance languages as a basis for the major earlier work before electronic corpora; Sprachen.

Vergleichbar und unvergleichlich. Wandruszka in his turn names Bally (1950) “as the originator of the technique of comparing translations” (Viberg 2002:121).

Gellerstam (1996:54) points further back to the third century AD, when the

comparison of Bible translations was used for editing purposes. “Later on, in the 16^th century, there was already a tradition to present the classical authors by means of parallel texts. The method has also been used for centuries for language leaning purposes. But today there is an upsurge of interest in translated texts that indicate new reasons for using the old method”

(Gellerstam 1996:54).

(18)

The use of computer corpora for contrastive studies is relatively new and the first bidirectional electronic translation corpus seems to have been compiled by Rudolf Filipovic and his collaborators in the Yugoslav Serbo-Croatian-English Contrastive project at the University of Zagreb. This corpus consisted of half of the Brown Corpus and its translations into Serbo-Croatian and a smaller corpus of original Serbo-Croatian texts translated into English (Altenberg & Granger 2002:40).

A precondition for any kind of cross-linguistic comparison is that the items compared to a certain extent share similar features or that there is a tertium comparationis (Altenberg and Granger 2002:15). “This requirement is especially strong when we are contrasting, i.e.

looking for differences, since it is only against a background of sameness that differences are significant” (James 1980:169). James calls this sameness constant (or tertium comparationis) while the differences are variables (1980:169). The best tertium comparationis available, as identified by James (1980:178), is translation equivalence.

However, the use of translation corpora can be a disadvantage for a contrastive study , since the translations are often coloured by the source language (Lauridsen, 1996:65), thus not showing the normal use of the target language. Translations are less creative than the original texts and are often grammatically more correct.

Translation corpora have limitations in comparison with corpora of original texts, since they have to be restricted to types of text that are actually translated. The quantity and types of texts and genres available depends on the source language and target language, since some languages are more often translated than others (Johansson 1999:6).

(19)

1.6 Material and method

1.6.1 The Oslo Multilingual Corpus

The material used for the analysis has been taken from the English – German – Norwegian subcorpus of the Oslo Multilingual Corpus (OMC), which contains 33 English original texts translated into Norwegian and German, 21 German original texts translated into English and Norwegian, and 22 Norwegian original texts translated into the other two languages (see appendix 2).

The OMC makes it possible to perform cross-linguistic studies both on the basis of original texts and their translations and on the basis of comparable original texts; cf. fig.1 (from Johansson 2004:63).

GERM ORIG

ENG NOR

TRANS TRANS

NOR ENG

ORIG ORIG

GERM TRANS

Figure 1 The Oslo Multilingual Corpus: English-Norwegian-German (as provided in Johansson 2004:63)

Other possibilities are comparing original and translated texts in the same language and comparing translated texts in the three languages.

(20)

Due to the limited scope of the present thesis this study only takes up English original texts and their translations into German and Norwegian.

This corpus study cannot reveal the whole truth of a linguistic feature; we should bear in mind that the results of the analysis are true only of that particular corpus. It would be unwise to make generalisations based only on the corpus examples from the OMC. As Catherine Ball notes, “the results of the analysis hold true for the corpus, and can only be generalized to the extent that a corpus is a representative sample” (Ball, 1994:295).

Nonetheless the OMC is a good tool for carrying out a contrastive analysis, a linguistic discipline that focuses on the similarities and differences between languages. This is how contrastive analysis is defined by Carl James (1980:3):

CA (Contrastive Analysis) is a linguistic enterprise aimed at producing inverted (i.e. contrastive, not comparative) two-valued typologies (a CA is always concerned with a pair of languages), and founded on the assumption that languages can be compared.

1.6.2 The handling of the data

Since this paper takes up only the English original go and its translations into German and Norwegian, I have searched for the lemma go (viz. go, goes, went, gone, going) in the OMC English originals. Considering the scope of the current thesis the instances had to be limited to 500 examples, which were chosen at random. These examples, together with their

translations, were extracted and entered into a database (FilemakerPro). Then they were analyzed for features considered most relevant for the investigation. A brief description of the kind of information that was included for the examples is given below:

Id: each sentence has been given a number

(21)

Ref: the code used in the corpus to identify the text which the sentence is taken from, e.g.

(JSM1.1.1); references for the translations were not included, as they were not considered necessary.

Eng orig: the English original sentence is quoted G trans: the German translation of the sentence N trans: the Norwegian translation of the sentence

E structure: English structure, where transitivity of the verb, type of multi-word verb and grammaticalized meanings were included: simple intransitive, simple copular, phrasal verb, prepositional verb, phrasal-prepositional verb, verb + verb combination, be going to, go on E meaning: the actual meaning of the verb: locomotion, metaphor, grammatical

E subject: the subject of the sentence: first, second, third human and third non-human

The type of information included for the German translation and the Norwegian translation is identical, in particular:

G structure, N structure: simple intransitive, phrasal, other verb, other phrasal, paraphrase, untranslated, reflexive and zero.

G verb, N verb: the actual verb used in the translation is quoted.

Comment: space to make any comments for each language.

An example of an entry of Filemaker is provided in Appendix 2.

(22)

1.7 Plan of the study

This thesis is divided into six chapters. In chapter 2 the classification scheme is outlined, as syntactic and semantic categories of the verbs constitute the starting point for the following contrastive analyses. Chapter 3 offers a presentation of the distribution of go in the sense of locomotion and its German and Norwegian translations in the material. Chapter 4 provides an overview of go used in metaphorical and specialized meanings, as well as their translations. In chapter 5 a survey of grammaticalized uses of go is provided with the translations. Finally, chapter 6 summarizes the main results of the investigation, as the previous three chapters are compared and the differences and similarities between the three cognates are established.

(23)

2 Patterns of the verb go

2.1 Introduction

Traditionally verbs are classified according to their complementation, i.e. “the grammatical pattern that follows them” (Quirk et al. 1985:1150). “The patterns of a word can be defined as all the words and structures which are regularly associated with the word and which contribute to its meaning. A pattern can be identified if a combination of words occurs relatively frequently, if it is dependent on a particular word choice, and if there is a clear meaning associated with it ” (Hunston & Francis 2000:37). The verb go shows various uses, and thus does not occur with only one type of complementation.

The following sections will give a short description of each category the English verb go was found in, namely, syntactic categories: intransitive, simple copular, multi-word forms (phrasal verb, prepositional verb, phrasal-prepositional verb, verb + verb combination), grammaticalized uses (be going to and go on); and some semantic categories which include:

locomotion, metaphorical and grammaticalized meanings.

2.2 Intransitive

Verbs are regarded as intransitive if they do not take an object, although some of them can have an adverbial element (Hasselgård et al. 2004:153).

(2.1a) I did n`t live here, I came and went, and now suddenly... (DL2.2)

(2.1b) Ich habe hier nicht gewohnt. Ich bin gekommen und gegangen, und plötzlich…

(2.1c) Jeg bodde ikke her, jeg dro innom og dro avgårde igjen, og nå plutselig…

(24)

In (2.1) simple intransitive go remained intransitive gehen in German, but became phrasal dra in the Norwegian translation.

2.3 Simple copular

Gois regarded as copular when it is followed by a subject predicative: “Copular verbs (or copulars) are used to associate some attribute, expressed by the subject predicative following the verb, with the subject of the clause (SVPs pattern)” (Biber et al. 1999:435).

(2.2a) Otherwise, the only choices you have are to go mad or to die. (ABR1.1.1.) (2.2b) Sonst bleibt einem nichts anderes übrig, als durchzudrehen oder zu sterben.

(2.2c) Ellers har du bare valget mellom å bli gal, eller dø.

In (2.2) the German translation of the copular to go mad is the verb durchdrehen. The Norwegian translation has a congruent structure with the verb bli.

2.4 Multi-word verbs

This category contains constructions of various transitivity patterns, which differ from the previous two. Examples in this category contain a type of multi-word verb with go as the lexical verb. Multi-word combinations “comprise relatively idiomatic units and function like single verbs” (Biber et al. 1999:403). Following the combination of the frameworks set out by Quirk et al. (1985:1150) and Biber et al. (1999:403-28) the multi-word verbs found in my data have been divided into four groups: phrasal verbs, prepositional verbs, phrasal-prepositional verbs, verb + verb combination.

(25)

2.4.1 Phrasal verb

“A phrasal verb is a two-word verb where the second element is an adverbial particle”

(Hasselgård et al. 2004:154), as in:

(2.3a) Four days earlier, Mrs. Rowe told him, she had had the same symptoms plus some vomiting, then the next day felt better and believed the trouble, whatever it was, was

going away. (AH1.2.1.)

(2.3b) Schon vor vier Tagen, hatte Mrs. Rowe ihm erzählt, hatte sie die gleichen Symptome verspürt. Sie mußte sich übergeben, fühlte sich aber am nächsten Tag wieder besser und glaubte, die Beschwerden, wo immer sie herkommen mochten, würden vergehen.

(2.3c) Fire dager tidligere hadde hun hatt samme symptomer, og hadde kastet litt opp.

Men neste dag følte hun seg bedre og trodde det gikk over.

(2.4a) Its companions conversed amongst themselves, laughing in throatless undertones as they went along. (BO1.1.4.)

(2.4b) Seine Gefährten unterhielten sich und lachten beim Gehen mit kehllosen Untertönen.

(2.4c) Følgesvennene dens pratet og lo i hviskende undertoner mens de gikk.

Phrasal verbs can sometimes be mixed up with free combinations of verb and adverb: the way to distinguish these is by referring to semantic criteria. The meaning of a phrasal verb cannot be deduced from the meanings of its elements, whereas the meaning of a free combination can be predicted by the meanings of its elements (Quirk et al. 1985:1152).

(26)

2.4.2 Prepositional verb

A prepositional verb consists of a verb plus a prepositional object (Biber et al. 1999:413), as in (2.5). The verb go plus preposition is regarded as a single unit and the noun phrase

following the preposition is considered an object of the prepositional verb.

(2.5a) If Ireland was in a war would you go into the army? (RDO1.1.) (2.5b) Wenn Irland im Krieg wäre, würdest du zur Armee gehen?

(2.5c) Hvis Irland kom i krig, ville du verve deg da?

”Many prepositional verbs constitute a single unit of meaning and can be replaced by one verb”, as in (2.6) go on = happen, and in (2.7) go with = follow:

(2.6a) When the people of Messina realized what was going on, it was already too late. (ABR1.1.1.)

(2.6b) Ehe die Leute in Messina begriffen, was eigentlich los war, war es schon zu spät.

(2.6c) Da folk i Messina skjønte hva som var på ferde , var det allerede for sent.

(2.7a) He enjoyed the perquisites which went with first-class travel, even if today they seemed less significant than usual. (AH1.1.s36)

(2.7b) Er genoß die Privilegien der ersten Klasse, selbst wenn sie ihm heute weniger wichtig erschienen als sonst.

(2.7c) Han nøt de små privilegiene som fulgte med første klasse, selv om de i dag virket mindre betydningsfulle enn vanlig.

(27)

2.4.3 Phrasal-prepositional verbs

Phrasal-prepositional verbs have characteristics of both phrasal and prepositional verbs. They consist of a lexical verb plus an adverbial particle plus a preposition (Biber et al. 1999:423).

In example (2.8) phrasal-prepositional go is rendered in German by a paraphrase whereas Norwegian has similar congruent structure:

(2.8a) This goes along with another belief of mine: that everyone else my age is an adult, whereas I am merely in disguise. (MA1.2.1.s40)

(2.8b) Und noch etwas anderes glaube ich: daß alle in meinem Alter erwachsen sind, während ich nur so tue als ob.

(2.8c) Dette henger sammen med en annen forestilling jeg har: den at alle andre på min alder er voksne, mens jeg bare er forkledt som en voksen.

(2.9a) Dammit, Sarah, you knew the score before you married me, and it was your choice to go through with it. (MW1.3.1.s42)

(2.9b) Verdammt noch mal, Sarah, du hast gewußt, was Sache ist, bevor wir geheiratet haben, und du warst einverstanden.

(2.9c) Pokker heller, Sarah, du var klar over hvordan sakene lå an før du giftet deg med meg, og det var ditt valg å gjennomføre det.

Phrasal-prepositional verbs function as a semantic unit and can sometimes be replaced by a single lexical verb (Biber et al. 1999:423), as in (2.9) and (2.10).

(2.10a) So I figure to go over to (=visit) his place tomorrow after breakfast and clear

(28)

(2.10b) Ich werd also morgen nach dem Frühstück zu ihm rübergehen und das alles klären.

(2.10c) Så jeg akter å gå bort til ham etter frokost i morgen og få ordnet opp i dette her.

(2.11a) He was a small boy of six who lived just around the corner from her, and for days he had been going on about this great talking parrot his father had given him.

(RD1.4.s55)

(2.11b) Er war ein kleiner Junge von sechs Jahren , der eben um die Ecke wohnte , und seit Tagen hatte er von nichts anderem als von diesem großen sprechenden Papagei geredet, den ihm sein Vater geschenkt hatte .

(2.11c) Han var en liten seks år gammel gutt som bodde like rundt hjørnet. I dagevis hadde han fortalt henne om den fantastiske snakkende papegøyen som faren hans hadde gitt ham.

2.4.4 Verb + verb combination

Verb + verb combinations have an idiomatic status (Biber et al. 1999:427). The only verb + verb combination found in the material is let go, as in (2.12) and (2.13). The most frequent translations of let go are illustrated in example (2.12), particularly German loss lassen and Norwegian slippe.

(2.12a) She had withstood the test on her, that bony pain, and he let her wrist go and went on to the door. (DL2.1.s17)

(2.12b) Alice hatte sich gegen diese Prüfung, gegen den knöchernen Schmerz behauptet. Jasper ließ ihr Handgelenk los und ging zur Tür.

(2.12c) Hun hadde klart prøven, dette knoklete ubehaget, og han slapp håndleddet hennes og gikk mot døra.

(29)

(2.13a) I'll say, OK, let the knife go, then the gun maybe, then the machine gun.

(PDJ3.1.6)

(2.13b) Okay, ich sage ihm, schmeiß das Messer weg, dann die Pistole, dann das Maschinengewehr.

(2.13c) Jeg ville si OK, kast kniven, så revolveren kanskje, og maskingeværet.

2.5 Grammaticalized meanings

One of the extreme meaning extensions that verbs may undergo is grammaticalization, i.e.

when they adopt grammaticalized meanings. In grammaticalized meanings verbs occur as part of multi-word combinations, e.g. be going to, go on + Ving.

2.5.1 Be going to

The construction be going to is the second most important way of expressing future time (Leech 2004:58). According to Leech, the general meaning of this construction is FUTURE AS OUTCOME OF PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES, which can be more specified asthe FUTURE OUTCOME OF PRESENT INTENTION and the FUTURE OUTCOME OF PRESENT CAUSE, which is similar to the way Quirk et al. (1985:§4.43) define the specific meanings of this marker:FUTURE FULFILLMENT OF PRESENT INTENTION and FUTURE RESULT OF PRESENT CAUSE.

The use of be going to as a future marker is more frequent in informal speech and is considered to be of “relatively recent origin” since it dates back to the 17^th century (Viberg 1999:103).

(30)

The FUTURE OUTCOME OF PRESENT INTENTION is mostly used with a human subject and with agentive verbs (“doing”) “which imply conscious exercise of will” (Leech 2004:59), e.g.:

(2.14a) Are you going to ask your mother? (DL2.1.) (2.14b) Wirst du deine: Mutter fragen?

(2.14c) Har du virkelig tenkt å spørre mora di?

(2.15a) That's so he knows you ent going to harm him, see. (MM1.2.) (2.15b) So weiß er, daß du ihm nichts tust.

(2.15c) Det er for at han skal vite at du ikke vil ham noe vondt, ser du.

The FUTURE OUTCOME OF PRESENT CAUSE is used with inanimate subjects, animals and human subjects, and is found with both “agentive” and “non-agentive” verbs (Leech

2004:59), as in:

(2.16a) That`s going to make him madder. (JSM1.1.4.) (2.16b) Das wird ihn noch so aufs hohe Roß setzen müssen.

(2.16c) Det blir han nok ikke blidere av.

(2.17a) Closing up for ten days is going to hurt us. (SK1.1.s493) (2.17b) Wir können es uns nicht leisten, zehn Tage dichtzumachen.

(2.17c) Det vil svi temmelig hardt å måtte stenge geskjeften i ti dager.

(31)

2.5.2 Go on

Go on +Ving is used to denote the continuation of an activity in progress, as in (2.18) and (2.19) below.

(2.18a) Although he worked in the city we had gone on living in our little house on the Reef for a time. (NG1.4)

(2.18b) Obwohl er in der Stadt arbeitete, hatten wir noch eine Zeitlang in unserem kleinen Haus gewohnt.

(2.18c) Etter at han hadde begynt å arbeide i byen fortsatte vi å bo på det gamle stedet en stund.

(2.19a) And then you went on driving? (AT1.3.) (2.19b) Und du bist weitergefahren?

(2.19c) Og så fortsatte du å kjøre?

2.6 Concluding remarks 2.6.1 Syntactic distribution

This chapter has provided an overview of the classification of go in my material. The categories that are applied here are formed according to the syntactic patterns in which go occurs. These categories will serve as an important starting point in the following chapters of this thesis.

Table 2-1 shows how the occurrences of go in my material are distributed across the syntactic categories established in this chapter.

(32)

Table 2-1 The distribution of go according to syntactic category syntactic category of go no. %

simple intransitive 151 30.2%

simple copular 17 3.4%

multi-word verb

phrasal verb prepositional verb phrasal-prepositional verb v+v combination

213

128 63 15 7

42.6%

25.6%

12.6%

3%

1.4%

grammaticalized

be going to go on

120

82 38

24%

16.4%

7.6%

total 500 100%

2.6.2 Distribution according to meaning

The semantic categories applied in this thesis are taken from Viberg (1999a:90), as has already been mentioned above. These meaning categories are locomotion, metaphorical and grammaticalized meanings. Table 2-2 shows the distribution of the verb go in the material by semantic category. As can be seen from table 2-2, 41.2% of the occurrences are used in the meaning of locomotion, 34.8% are metaphorical and 24% of the occurrences have a

grammaticalized meaning. With 41.2% of the uses in the material, locomotion is the most basic meaning of the verb go and will be further investigated in the next chapter.

Table 2-2 The distribution of go according to meaning

meaning no %

locomotion 206 41.2%

metaphorical 174 34.8%

grammaticalized 120 24%

total 500 100%

(33)

3 Locomotion

3.1 Introduction

The present chapter takes up the use of the English verb go and its German and Norwegian translations in my material in the sense of locomotion, which is the most basic meaning in the three languages. The syntactic categories established in the previous chapter will serve as a starting point. Translations are classified as congruent, with the same syntactic structure as in the original version, or divergent, with a change of structure.

There is a distinction between the general term motion and locomotion. The term motion implies that an object or figure is moving with respect to another object, whereas locomotion is a specific type of motion, where the object or figure starts out in one place at a given time and ends up in another place later (Storjohann 2003, Viberg 1999a). Human locomotion requires the object or the figure to be a human being. Human locomotion is further distinguished as either self-propelled motion or motion by means of a vehicle (Viberg 1999a, Storjohann 2003).

The general overview of translations of go presented here includes 206 occurrences of go used in the sense of locomotion. Table 3-1 shows the distribution of the verb go according to syntactic categories when the verb refers to locomotion. As can be seen from table 3-1, the most frequent syntactic category is simple intransitive followed by multi-word verb.

(34)

Table 3-1 The distribution of go according to syntactic category when the verb means locomotion

syntactic category no. % simple intransitive 123 59.7%

multi-word verb phrasal

prepositional

phrasal-prepositional v + v combination

84 73 6 3 2

40.7%

35.4%

2.9%

1.4%

0.9%

Total 206 100%

3.2 The locomotion verb go and its German translations

Table 3.2 gives an overview of the translation equivalents of the verb go in German. As can be seen from the table, the most common translation of the verb go used in the sense of locomotion is its cognate German gehen (56.3%), as in (3.1)

(3.1a) Go rearrange your tools, why don’t you; line up your wrenches from biggest to smallest instead of from smallest to biggest; that’s always fun. (AT1.3)

(3.1b) Geh doch dein Werkzeug neu sortieren, ordne deine Schraubenschlüssel vom größten zum kleinsten anstatt vom kleinsten zum größten, so was macht immer Spaß.

(3.1c) Gå og rydd opp i verktøyet ditt, hvorfor gjør du ikke det, ordner skrunøklene dine fra den største til den minste, i stedet for fra den minste til den største det er alltid litt moro.

In the second place in Table 3-2 is the category ‘minor varieties’, accounting for 10 % of the occurrences. This category contains verbs which were used less than twice as a

translation of the verb go meaning locomotion. The size of this category underlines the fact that go can cover a large number of more specific meanings, as in (3.2), since it is a very general verb.

(35)

(3.2a) Pat said to them, as they silently went up, Alice, don't think we don't think you aren't a bloody marvel! (DL2.3)

(3.2b) Während sie schweigend die Treppe hinaufstiegen, sagte Pat zu ihnen: "Du mußt nicht glauben, Alice, daß wir dich nicht für ein wahres Goldstück halten!"

(3.2c) Nesten lydløst begynte de å gå oppover trappene. "Alice," sa Pat, "du må bare ikke tro vi syns du er noe annet enn et jævla mirakel!"

In the third place is the category paraphrase, accounting for 7.7% of the occurrences.

The category refers to instances where it has been regarded impossible to find a verb which could be said to correspond to the verb go in the original, but the meaning of the original expression with go is conveyed by using devices other than a verb, as in:

(3.3a) The Greeks going to the Trojan War left Philoctetes behind on an island because his wound smelled so bad. (ROB1.2.1.s60)

(3.3b) Auf ihrer Fahrt nach Troja setzten die Griechen Philoktet auf einer Insel aus, weil seine Wunde einen unerträglichen Gestank verströmte.

(3.3c) Underveis til trojaner-krigen etterlot grekerne Filoktetes på ei øy fordi det luktet så ille av såret hans.

In example (3.3) the prepositional phrase auf ihrer Fahrt is used in the German translation to convey the meaning expressed by the verb go in the original.

(36)

Table 3-2 German translations of go used in the meaning of locomotion Engl.categ.

Germ.trans intrans. phrasal prepos phrasal-

prep V+V Total

gehen 70 38 4 2 2 116 (56.3%)

fahren 9 6 1 16 (7.7 %)

kommen 3 2 5 (2.4%)

sein 4 4 (1.9%)

verschwinden 1 2 3 (1.4%)

laufen 1 2 3 (1.4%)

ziehen 1 2 3 (1.4%)

steigen 1 2 3 (1.4%)

besuchen 2 2 (0.9%)

aufsuchen 2 2 (0.9%)

treten 2 2 (0.9%)

reisen 1 1 2 (0.9%)

minor var. 9 11 1 21 (10.1%)

paraphrase 8 7 1 16 (7.7%)

untranslated 9 9 (4.3%)

Total 123 (59.7%)

73 (35.4%)

6 (2.9%)

3 (1.4%)

2 (0.9%)

206(100%)

Next we find the verb fahren which is used as a translation of go in 7.7% of the occurrences where go describes motion in a vehicle. While the English verb go seems to be neutral with respect to the means of locomotion, there is lexical differentiation in German in terms of walking and traveling in a vehicle, as in (3.4):

(3.4a) Moving the automatic shift into drive, he eased out of the line of parked cars and went after the Daimler-Jaguar. (FF1.1.1.s11)

(3.4b) Rawlings legte die automatische Gangschaltung ein, manövrierte den Volvo aus der Reihe der parkenden Wagen heraus und fuhr hinter dem Daimler-Jaguar her.

(3.4c) Nå satte han automatgiret på "drive", gled ut av rekken av parkerte biler og kjørte etter Daimler-Jaguaren.

4.3% of the translations belong to the category ‘untranslated’, which contains the cases where the verb go was not translated. In the following example the main verb in the translations is recoverable from context.

(37)

(3.5a) You did have to go. (SK1.1.)

(3.5b) Sie lächelte und sagte triumphierend: "Siehst du, du mußtest doch!"

(3.5c) Du måtte allikevel.

The cases where whole sentences were not translated were classified under the category

‘zero’. This category is not included in table 3-2, since there are no such examples in the German translations when the verb go refers to locomotion.

3.2.1 Multi-word verb go and its German translations

The multi-word verb use is the most frequently attested use of the verb go in my material, with 42.6% (213 from 500) out of the total number in the material. Since this chapter deals only with cases where the verb go refers to locomotion only those cases will be further investigated here. Out of 206 occurrences of the locomotion verb go 84 are multi-word verbs, which make up 40.7% of the cases. As for the translations, 66.6% are of the congruent type, i.e. the same syntactic pattern has been kept in going from the original to the translation, which means that congruent translations here consist of phrasal German verbs. Table 3.3 gives an overview of the German verbs which correspond to multi-word verb go in the translations and their syntactic patterns.

(38)

Table 3-3 German translations of multi-word verb go Germ.categ.

Germ.trans. phrasal single verb paraphrase total

gehen 41 4 45 (53.5%)

fahren 5 2 7 (8.3%)

kommen 2 2 (2.3%)

laufen 2 2 (2.3%)

ziehen 1 1 2 (2.3%)

steigen 1 1 2 (2.3%)

verschwinden 2 2 (2.3%)

minor var. 4 9 13 (15.4%)

paraphrase 9 9 (10.7%)

total 56 (66.6%) 19 (22.6%) 9 (10.7%) 84 (100%)

Although the translations include a wide variety of other verbs, as can be seen from Table 3-3, the main equivalent of the multi-word verb go is its cognate gehen. The translations are distributed across four categories. The first category ‘phrasal’ includes all types of multi-word verbs, members of which are treated as congruent. In the second category a single-word verb was used in the translations; these are treated here as divergent. The explanation of the categories ‘paraphrase’ was given in section 3.2; these are also treated as divergent.

There is a substantial degree of similarity between the two languages, both with respect to syntax and semantics, as indicated by the relatively large share of the congruent translations as well as by the fact that the German verb gehen is used as a translation equivalent of the multi-word verb go in 53.5 % (45) of the occurrences.

As stated above, the multi-word verb go has been translated by German multi-word verbs in 66.6 % of the cases. Table 3-3 above lists 4 multi-word verbs that were used as translations of the multi-word verb go more than once. In addition, there are 6 multi-word verbs that occur only once, in the category ‘minor varieties’. Thus, this group of congruent translations is still quite diverse, since quite a considerable number of different verbs have

(39)

German cognate gehen. None of the other verbs used as translations of go come close to competing with it.

In the next sections various multi-word types will be surveyed.

3.2.1.1 Phrasal verbs

35.4 % (73) of the multi-word verbs with go in the meaning of locomotion belong to the category of phrasal verbs. The most frequently used phrasal verbs in the material are go around, go back, go off, go home, go along. These are illustrated in the next examples (3.6), (3.7), (3.8).

(3.6a) Fibich urged Christine to go home, for he knew that the task belonged to him.

(AB1.3)

(3.6b) Fibich drängte Christine, sie solle nach Hause gehen, denn er wußte, daß diese Aufgabe ihm oblag.

(3.6c) Fibich ba Christine innstendig om å gå hjem, for han visste at dette var hans oppgave.

(3.7a) True, I’d never felt the slightest urge to go back; I’d made the habit of shunning people who came from there, because I didn’t want to be reminded of anything I’d cut myself from. (ABR1.1.1)

(3.7b) Gewiß, ich selbst hatte nie den leisesten Wunsch verspürt zurückzugehen; ich hatte mir angewöhnt, Menschen von dort aus dem Weg zu gehen, weil ich an nichts erinnert werden wollte, wovon ich mich frei gemacht hatte.

(3.7c) Sant nok, jeg hadde aldri følt den minste trang til å reise tilbake; jeg hadde for vane å sky folk som kom derfra fordi jeg ikke ville bli minnet om noe jeg hadde løsrevet meg fra.

(3.8a) I can’t go around looking like this forever? (RD1.6)

(40)

(3.8b) Ich kann doch nicht ewig so rumlaufen!

(3.8c) Jeg kan ikke gå rundt og se slik ut i all evighet!

As can be seen from the examples above, the preferred translation of phrasal go is a phrasal verb in German. Table 3-4 presents the syntactic categories of the translations of phrasal go.

67.1 % of the translations are of the congruent type; 47.9 % of these are translated by the German verb gehen.

Table 3-4 Syntactic categories of the German translations of the phrasal verbs with go syntactic category no. %

single-word verb

simple intransitive gehen other verb

16

2 14

21.9%

2.7%

19.1%

multi-word verb

phrasal gehen other phrasal

49

35 14

67.1%

47.9%

19.1%

paraphrase 8 10.9%

total 73 100%

Other multi-word verbs found in the material in the meaning of locomotion were hardly sufficient to warrant any further investigation. There are 6 occurrences of prepositional verbs, only 3 examples of phrasal-prepositional verbs and two occurrences of the verb + verb

combinations in the material, which are illustrated in the examples (3.9) and (3.10).

(3.9a) She had taken it all in, in a moment, Alice knew, but it seemed Jasper did not, for he said heartily, Right Alice, let‘s go.(DL2.3)

(3.9b) Alice dachte: "Sie hat die Lage in einem einzigen Augenblick verstanden."

Aber Jasper scheinbar nicht, denn er sagte munter: "Also gut Alice, gehen wir".

(3.9c) På et lite øyeblikk hadde det gått opp for henne, visste Alice, men Jasper var nok ikke klar over det. Han sa, hjertelig: "Så flott da, Alice, kom igjen."

(41)

As can be seen from (3.9) and (3.10) we get the cognates gehen and gå in the translations, but as has been mentioned before these examples are not sufficient to allow any further

observations.

(3.10a) "Let's go." (WB1.3.s44) (3.10b) "Gehen wir."

(3.10c) "La oss gå."

3.2.2. Simple intransitive go and its German equivalents

59.7% (123) of the occurrences of the verb go in the meaning of locomotion are of the simple intransitive type. In this category 77.2% of the translations into German are of the congruent type; out of these 48.7 % are translated by German gehen, as in the following examples (3.11) and (3.12) where intransitive go is translated by intransitive gehen.

(3.11a) I didn’t live here, I came and went, and now suddenly ... (DL2.2)

(3.11b) Ich habe hier nicht gewohnt. Ich bin gekommen und gegangen, und plötzlich...

(3.11c) Jeg bodde ikke her, jeg dro innom og dro avgårde igjen, og nå plutselig...

In the next example (3.12) the German and Norwegian translations use the modal verbs

“können” and “kann” to convey the English “free to go”.

(3.12a) It was one of those deaths that make no sense the kind where the hold up man has collected his money and is free to go but decides, instead, first to shoot each and every person through the back of the skull. (AT1.2)

(42)

(3.12b) Es war ein sinnloser, unbegreiflicher Mord einer jener Fälle, in denen der Bandit das Geld schon eingesteckt hat und ungehindert gehen konnte, sich statt dessen aber entschließt, zuerst jeden einzelnen Anwesenden durch einen Genickschuß zu töten.

(3.12c) Det var et av de helt meningsløse dødsfallene der ransmannen har samlet sammen pengene og bare kan gå, men i stedet bestemmer seg for å skyte hver eneste person gjennom bakhodet.

Paraphrases were used in the translations nine times which makes up 7.3 % of the

occurrences, which is a little less frequent than its use with multi-word verbs (10.7 %). In (3.13) a paraphrase is used in the German translation, i.e. other parts of speech are found to express the meaning of the verb go.

(3.13a) As I left to go to the car, I looked up at the revolving solar heating apparatus on the roof and saw that it was frozen solid, and I have a sudden longing for a house full of cast iron radiators. (PM1.2)

(3.13b) Auf dem Weg zu meinem Wagen schaute ich hoch zum rotierenden Solarheizapparat auf dem Dach und bemerkte, daß er ganz zugefroren war. Ich spürte plötzlich ein Verlangen nach einem Haus voller gußeiserner Radiatoren.

(3.13c) Da jeg gikk ut til bilen, tittet jeg opp mot det roterende solvarmepanelet på taket og så at det var helt tilfrosset. Med ett følte jeg sterk lengsel etter støpejerns-radiatorer rundt om i huset.

Table 3-5 gives an overview of the distribution of the simple intransitive go according to syntactic category.

(43)

Table 3-5 Syntactic distribution of the German translations of the simple intransitive go syntactic categories no %

single word verb

intransitive gehen other verb

95

60 35

77.2%

48.7%

28.4%

multi-word verb

phrasal gehen other phrasal

10

9 1

8.1%

7.3%

0.8%

paraphrase 9 7.3%

untranslated 9 7.3%

total 123 100%

3.3 The locomotion verb go and its Norwegian translations

Table 3-6 shows the translation equivalents of the verb go in Norwegian. The cognate gå is the most frequent translation of the verb go in this particular meaning, with 107 occurrences or 51.9 % of the cases, and generally the use of gå in these examples indicates self-propelled motion, as in (3.14).

(3.14a) The Queen went upstairs, scraped the ice from the inside of the window and looked down at Trish, who was scraping ice off the windscreen of her car with what looked like a kitchen spatula, the sort the Queen occasionally used at barbecues at Balmoral.

(ST1.1.8)

(3.14b) Die Queen ging in den ersten Stock, kratzte das Eis von der Innenseite des Fensters und sah zu Trish hinunter, die Eis von der Scheibe ihres Wagens schabte, und zwar mit einem Gerät, das wie ein Bratenheber aussah ähnlich wie das Ding, das die Königin gelegentlich bei Grillfesten in Balmoral verwendete.

(3.14c) Dronningen gikk opp i annen etasje igjen, skrapte is roser fra innsiden av soveværelsevinduet og kikket ned på Trish, som sto og skrapte is av frontruten på bilen sin med noe som så ut som en stekespade, et redskap dronningen hadde brukt ved flere

anledninger under grillfester på Balmoral.

(44)

Next in terms of frequency we find the verb dra, accounting for 16 % of the occurrences, mainly in the cases when its difficult to determine whether the verb go in the original refers to locomotion in a vehicle or to self-propelled motion. The verb dra seems to be more neutral than gå when it comes to instrument features, whereas gå is more often used when the verb refers to motion on foot. Compare (3.15), where go is neutral with respect to instrument features and (3.16), where it refers to self-propelled motion:

(3.15a) I don't have to go to New York; I'll go to Dulles. (AT1.3)

(3.15b) Es muß nicht unbedingt New York sein. Ich nehme auch Dulles!

(3.15c) Jeg behøver ikke dra til New York, jeg kan dra til Dulles.

(3.16a) He gave the door a sharp push and they went into a large shadowy hall where stairs went strongly up, turned at a wide landing, and rose out of sight. (DL2.1)

(3.16b) Er versetzte der Tür einen heftigen Tritt; sie ging auf, und Alice und Jasper betraten einen großen, dunklen Hausflur. Eine breite Treppe führte nach oben zu einem großen Treppenabsatz, änderte dort die Richtung und entschwand den Blicken.

(3.16c) Han dyttet døra opp, og de gikk inn i en dunkel, rommelig hall med en massiv trapp opp mot den brede avsatsen der trappen bøyde av og fortsatte oppover, ut av syne.

(45)

Table 3-6 Norwegian translations of the locomotion verb go Eng. categ.

Norweg. intrans phrasal prep phrasal-

prep V+V total

gå 64 39 2 1 1 107 (51.9%)

dra 19 14 33 (16.1%)

reise 5 5 10 (4.8%)

komme 6 1 1 8 (3.8%)

kjøre 1 2 3 (1.4%)

ta 2 1 3 (1.4%)

stikke 2 2 4 (1.9%)

oppsøke 2 2 (0.9%)

være 2 2 (0.9%)

bli 1 1 2 (0.9%)

følge 1 1 2 (0.9%)

traske 2 2 (0.9%)

paraphrase 10 1 2 13 (6.3%)

untranslated 5 5 (2.4%)

zero 1 1 2 (0.9%)

minor var. 2 4 2 1 9 (4.3%)

total 123 (59.7%)

73(35.4%) 6(2.9%) 3(1.4%) 2(0.9%) 206 (100%)

In the third place is the category ‘paraphrase’ with 6.3 % of the occurrences. In this category the meaning of the verb go is expressed by other devices than a verb, e.g. (3.17), where the Norwegian translation uses noun “reisemål” to convey the meaning of go.

(3.17a) He couldn't think of anywhere else to go. (BC1.19) (3.17b) Er wußte nicht, wohin er sonst hätte reisen sollen.

(3.17c) Han kunne ikke finne på noe annet reisemål.

There are two occurrences in the ‘zero’ category, where the whole sentence was omitted in the translation. 2.4% of the occurrences belong to the category ‘untranslated’ where the verb go is not translated, but the meaning of the sentence is preserved, as in (3.18):

(3.18a) Tom went to pull off his vest. (MM1.2)

(46)

(3.18b) Als Tom ihm das Hemd ausziehen wollte, zuckte Willie zusammen.

(3.18c) Tom tok av trøyen.

3.3.1 Multi-word verb go and its Norwegian translations

As has been mentioned before, according to my material the verb go is most frequently used as a multi-word verb, accounting for 42.6 % (213) of the total number of the occurrences; 84 of them are used in the meaning of locomotion, translations of which, into the Norwegian language, will be further examined in this section. Table 3-7 gives an overview of the Norwegian verbs which correspond to multi-word verb go in the translations and their syntactic patterns.

Table 3-7 Translations of the multi-word verb go in the meaning of locomotion and their syntactic patterns

Nowegian categ Norwegian trans.

phrasal single- word verb

paraphrase untranslated zero total

gå 37 6 43 (51.1%)

dra 14 14 (16.6%)

reise 5 5 (5.9%)

komme 2 2 (2.3%)

kjøre 3 3 (3.5%)

stikke 2 2 (2.3%)

traske 2 2 (2.3%)

paraphrase 3 3 (3.5%)

untranslated - -

zero 1 1 (1.1%)

minor variations 9 9 (10.7%)

total 74

(88%) 6 (7.1%) 3 (3.5%) - 1

(1.1%) 84 (100%)

There are 88 % (74) congruent translations in the Norwegian material, 37 (44 %) of which were translated by the cognate gå, e.g. (3.19):

(47)

(3.19a) Mum went back to the herbalist, who now gave the final set of instructions.

(BO1.1.8)

(3.19b) Mama ging zu der Kräuterheilerin zurück, die ihr die letzten Anweisungen gab.

(3.19c) Mamma gikk tilbake til urtelegen, som ga henne de siste instruksene om hva hun skulle gjøre.

Although the translations include a wide variety of other verbs, there is one verb worth

mentioning here, dra, which was used as a translation of go in 16.6 % of the cases, all of them of the congruent type, as in (3.20):

(3.20a) They had been small enough and flat enough to pack and go around the world:

they had never been lost. (FW1.4)

(3.20b) Sie waren klein und schmal gewesen, man konnte sie leicht einpacken und überall hin mitnehmen: sie waren nie verlorengegangen.

(3.20c) De hadde vært små nok og flate nok til å pakke og dra med seg rundt i verden:

de var aldri blitt borte.

Congruent cases are found in the first category ‘phrasal’. The category ‘single-word verb’ is of the non-congruent type like the categories ‘paraphrase’, ‘untranslated’ and ‘zero’. The explanation of these categories can be found in section 3.2. In my material there are only six examples where the phrasal verb go has been translated by single-word verb gå, as in (3.21).

(3.21a) Its companions conversed amongst themselves, laughing in throatless undertones as they went along. (BO1.1.4)

(48)

(3.21b) Seine Gefährten unterhielten sich und lachten beim Gehen mit kehllosen Untertönen.

(3.21c) Følgesvennene dens pratet og lo i hviskende undertoner mens de gikk.

The high degree of similarity of the English and Norwegian languages, both with respect to syntax and semantics, is shown by the high number 74 (88 %) of congruent translations of the verb go, as well as by the fact that the Norwegian verb gå was used as a translation of go in a relatively large number of cases (51.1 %)

As mentioned before, the multi-word verb go has been translated by Norwegian multi- word verbs in 88 % of the cases. Table 3-7 above lists 7 multi-word verbs that were used as translations of the multi-word verb go more than once. In addition, there are 9 multi-word verbs that occur only once, in the category ‘minor varieties’. The group of congruent translations is quite diverse since quite a considerable number of different verbs have been used to translate the verb go. But the main congruent translation equivalents by far in the Norwegian material are its cognate gå followed by the verb dra. In the next section various multi-word types will be surveyed.

3.3.1.1 Phrasal verbs

Table 3-8 shows the distribution of the Norwegian translations of the phrasal verb go

according to syntactic category. As can be seen from the table, 91.7 % of the occurrences are of the congruent type, which is a relatively quite high proportion. 47.9 % of the congruent translations contained the verb gå, as in (3.22) below.

(3.22a) You go away. (MM1.1)

(49)

(3.22b) Geh bloß weg.

(3.22c) Gå vekk!

Table 3-8 The syntactic distribution of the translations of the multi-word verb go syntactic categories no. %

single-word verb

simple intransitive gå other verb

4

-

5.4%

multi-word verb

phrasal gå other phrasal

67

35 32

91.7%

47.9%

43.8%

paraphrase 1 1.3%

zero 1 1.3%

total 73 100%

The verb dra appears as a translation equivalent of go in 19.1 % of the cases. All of the occurrences of the verb dra are of the congruent type. There is one occurrence of ‘paraphrase’

and one case of ‘zero’ where the whole sentence was not translated. The only single-word verb used in the translations is the verb gå. The Norwegian translations of the phrasal verbs seem to have one of the highest degrees of the congruent occurrences, but this claim will be further investigated as we look at the translations of other types of the multi-word verb go.

As has been mentioned in section 3.2.1, the number of other multi-word verb types found in the material in the meaning of locomotion is hardly sufficient to allow any further investigation.

The polysemous cognates English go, German gehen and Norwegian gå : a corpus-based contrastive study

English go, German gehen and Norwegian gå:

A Corpus­Based Contrastive Study

by Alla Cej

A Thesis Presented to

the Department of Literature,

Area Studies and European Languages

University of Oslo

Spring term 2008

Contents

List of tables

List of figures

1 Introduction

2 Patterns of the verb go

3 Locomotion

A CorpusBased Contrastive Study